O alijamento é um instituto próprio do Direito Marítimo (romano). Trata-se do arremesso de mercadorias ou instrumentos da embarcação a fim de salvar ambas do naufrágio. Seu efeito é a repartição de danos entre os envolvidos (contributio), a qual caracteriza, com o tempo, as avarias grossas. No Digesto, é possível encontrar (quase) todos os elementos que o constituem. Dentre esses, discute-se sobre a intencionalidade do ato, ou seja, quem decide sua realização. Ao assumirem a locatio conductio como tutela do instituto, os juristas romanos escolhem o magister navis [= capitão da embarcação] como único elo comum entre todos os interessados no evento, e, assim, capaz de decidir sobre esse (D. 14, 2, 2 pr.). Entretanto, também consideram a existência de uma junta deliberativa, formada pelos comerciantes a bordo e passageiros, que deveriam ser consultados (D. 14, 2, 2, 1). Da dúvida se o ato intencional faz referência ao magister navis ou também à junta deliberativa, revela-se um jogo de poder, que condiciona a leitura da lex Rhodia. É necessário determinar o papel desempenhado por cada um desses no alijamento para que se conheça seu conceito no período justinianeu e ajude a compreender esse aspecto na tradição jurídico-marítima posterior. / The jettison is a specific Admiralty (Roman) Law institution. It means the sacrifice of cargo or ship instruments in order to save both from shipwreck. Its effect is the splitting damages between the involved parts (contributio), which characterizes, in time, the gross average. In the Digest, it\'s possible to find (almost) all elements that constitute it. Among them, the intentionality of the act is debated, it means, who can decide about that disposal. Once they agreed with the locatio conductio to patronize the institution, the Roman jurists chose the magister navis [= \"captain of the ship\"] as the only common link between all interested parts in the occurrence and, therefore, capable of making this call (D. 14, 2, 2 pr.). Nonetheless, they also considered the existence of a deliberative commission, composed by the onboard merchants and passengers, who should be consulted (D. 14, 2, 2, 1). From the doubt whether the intentional act refers to the magister navis or also to the deliberative commission, a game of power unveils, conditioning the lex Rhodia reading. Determining the role played by each one of these characters in the jettison is necessary to know its concept in the Justinian period and help to comprehend this aspect in the posterior Admiralty Law tradition.

O alijamento é um instituto próprio do Direito Marítimo (romano). Trata-se do arremesso de mercadorias ou instrumentos da embarcação a fim de salvar ambas do naufrágio. Seu efeito é a repartição de danos entre os envolvidos (contributio), a qual caracteriza, com o tempo, as avarias grossas. No Digesto, é possível encontrar (quase) todos os elementos que o constituem. Dentre esses, discute-se sobre a intencionalidade do ato, ou seja, quem decide sua realização. Ao assumirem a locatio conductio como tutela do instituto, os juristas romanos escolhem o magister navis [= capitão da embarcação] como único elo comum entre todos os interessados no evento, e, assim, capaz de decidir sobre esse (D. 14, 2, 2 pr.). Entretanto, também consideram a existência de uma junta deliberativa, formada pelos comerciantes a bordo e passageiros, que deveriam ser consultados (D. 14, 2, 2, 1). Da dúvida se o ato intencional faz referência ao magister navis ou também à junta deliberativa, revela-se um jogo de poder, que condiciona a leitura da lex Rhodia. É necessário determinar o papel desempenhado por cada um desses no alijamento para que se conheça seu conceito no período justinianeu e ajude a compreender esse aspecto na tradição jurídico-marítima posterior. / The jettison is a specific Admiralty (Roman) Law institution. It means the sacrifice of cargo or ship instruments in order to save both from shipwreck. Its effect is the splitting damages between the involved parts (contributio), which characterizes, in time, the gross average. In the Digest, it\'s possible to find (almost) all elements that constitute it. Among them, the intentionality of the act is debated, it means, who can decide about that disposal. Once they agreed with the locatio conductio to patronize the institution, the Roman jurists chose the magister navis [= \"captain of the ship\"] as the only common link between all interested parts in the occurrence and, therefore, capable of making this call (D. 14, 2, 2 pr.). Nonetheless, they also considered the existence of a deliberative commission, composed by the onboard merchants and passengers, who should be consulted (D. 14, 2, 2, 1). From the doubt whether the intentional act refers to the magister navis or also to the deliberative commission, a game of power unveils, conditioning the lex Rhodia reading. Determining the role played by each one of these characters in the jettison is necessary to know its concept in the Justinian period and help to comprehend this aspect in the posterior Admiralty Law tradition.

This is a study of inter-organizational relations, especially of control relations, applied to Swedish state enterprise.The growing interdependence between different parts of society as well as the dynamic environment of organizations bring forward a need for new patterns of interaction. Organizations of very dissimilar types have to cooperate in new areas. The state enterprises have an external environment that exhibit both political and economic characteristics. The control relation, to the owner, may involve both types.The study consists of three parts. Part one present an initial theoretical framework, used in an empirical study (part two). This shows the need for a further development. A revised and enlarged framework is presented in part three. In the initial framework the concept of control, within a systems approach, was the focus of investigation. The approach was traditional and pointed to the importance of structures and of characteristics of the decision process. Control of two levels was discussed — organizational control and control of specific situation. The model suggested was mainly developed for description of control of state enterprises.The empirical study was conducted as an interview study in nine state enterprises. The interviews were of a semi-structured type and the purpose was to gain new insights as to the conditions of control of organizations. The enterprises were selected according to mission, three types were identified: strictly political tasks, strictly economic tasks and a mixture of tasks. The findings were that organizational control differed according to task so that political task gives a more strict control: The differences in control of ongoing avtivity was less pronounced. The most striking finding was the relevance of expectations of control. The empirical study led to demands for a more actor-oriented approach.This was the starting point for the revised and enlarged framework. A review of studies of relations in the systems approach and within a more actor-oriented approach was made. The role of the actor in the organization is discussed. The importance of structural conditions and of process in control is also analyzed. This review and analysis forms the basis for a somewhat different approach to relations. A concept of complexity is developed. This concept involve the total variation in a situation. Complexity is a main factor in perceptions of uncertainty < Coping with uncertainty gives power, which is the prerequisite of control.These concepts are used to form a game approach to control. Control is considered as the result of a game of power. Two types of games are presented — for organizations as a whole and for situations of a deviant character. In both types actors and processes are of prime interest. / digitalisering@umu